OROP: No Silver Bullet

Emotions have run amok on One Rank One Pension since the governmental baton passed to the NDA last year. In a fashion, this is actually a compliment to the PM's leadership. After all, expectations are sky-high in light of the ruling party's widely perceived fauji-friendly tilt, made even more striking by the UPA's characteristic somnolence (that election-eve accpetance of OROP was disingenuous, if not downright dishonest).

Imagination need not be stretched to understand why OROP demands find widespread support. Naturally, the nation's heart-strings tug easily for those that guard her borders. Our Forces' stellar record of aid in times of calamity or strife comes in handy too, no doubt. To top it all, the institution enjoys a moral high ground, thanks to a reputation unsullied barring occasional blemish, standing tall amidst a general decline in standards of public life (that plumbed new depths in UPA years).

So why the delay? The ask itself is clear: to index pensions to benefits for currently serving personnel. In other words, the Government implement a system of 'defined benefits' (percentage of last salary; with math around years worked), paying uniform pension to retirees in the same rank. Yet, be simple as it may, the commitment is not sans ramification. It is a multi-dimensional issue, wherein the crux is money.

For starters, a bitter pill must be swallowed immediately. In other words, funds are needed to bring pensions of old retired on par with new. Unfortunately, this hit isn't merely one-time, but inflates GOI's pension bill considerably in each pay revision cycle (roughly every decade) going forward. With our economic planning often a precarious balanacing act, this has been a deal-breaker hitherto.

Additonally, there is clear-and-present danger that OROP for the fauj opens a Pandora's Box and demands of a similar nature could emerge from other service groups. This includes Police and para-military, but could cross over to non-uniformed personnel too. Railwaymen appear to be first off the mark here (we hear noises around 'essential lifeline of the country' etc) but others may well follow suit. It is this deluge of politico-legal and economic tangles that worries the government.

Fact is that defined benefit pension programmes always run the risk of unsustainability. Many countries have junked such plans on account of the rising burden on declining (productive) populations to support a growing number of retirees. Granted we aren't there today, but what is to suggest that we never will?

As conundrums go, this is hardly unsolvable. One need look no further than our Central Government employees who have been on a defined contribution (versus defined benefit) programme for over a decade. In fact, the National Pension System is class-leading, with multiple low-cost, managed-risk product options (especially those that enable qualified equity exposure) and offers an excellent alternative. Switch to NPS, however, shall be no cakewalk and would entail a mindset shift than mere policy change.

Parsing through all these requires time: a commodity the Modi Govt may not have. It remains true that the UPA's wanton profligacy in the name of social inclusion has pushed India close to the edge of a fiscal precipice. An ill-conceived or reckless OROP implementation must not become another nail in this coffin-in-the-making. That is a prospect our fauji brethern would certainly wish to avoid.

NCTC - Intel Inside

By all accounts, Shri P Chidambaram, our Home Minister, does not take kindly to fools. Nor, can stakes be higher than on Terror, with multiple strikes over the few years highlighting our extraordinarily vulnerable national security status. Yet, when GoI shared a "50 Most Wanted" dossier with Pakistan a few months ago, it was a disgrace (two on the list were in India). That very fortnight, CBI's pursuit of Kim Davy (Purulia arms drop notoriety) in Denmark ended with egg on the face owing to an "expired" extradition notice.

Those 'bureaucratic gaffes' were, of course, only the latest in long history of ignominy (Kargil, 26/11, David Headley, Red Corridor being but a few of its more sordid chapters). Questions were asked of Indian intelligence, or the lack of it. In response we were told to think beyond the CBI, NIA, IB and RAW, all under our venerable Home Minister's charge, to NATGRID, his pet project. NATGRID would allow 11 security agencies access to 21 linked databases covering financial, travel, immigration, asset ownership, telephone and internet usage information for individuals and entities in the country.

Arguments had been made against a NATGRID style response. There were concerns around diffusing focus away from building good ol' Hum-Int with a grandiose but potentially ineffective programme. For instance, it may not raise any alert for an American citizen with Caucasian looks, no cellphone or financial records in his name (save, perhaps, every itinerary with return via Pakistan; an obvious need to brief ISI-LeT) thereby missing Headley. Equally, the potential for assault on personal liberty and data privacy with Government's power to obtain sensitive information without warrant or consent, bred its own share of D Thomases.

Resolution to these, naturally, lay in a well-considered approach. Last week's order notifying the creation of NCTC, alas, displays none of this sure-footedness. In typical PC fashion, it managed to raise hackles all over instead. Opposition-ruled states are up in arms, for one, when Center-State cooperation would be ideal for seamless execution. Likewise, we have conflicts within GoI's own framework with RAW (external intel); NTRO (collection and analysis); and NIA (investigation and prosecution), all of whom have mandates broader than counterterrorism. Nesting the NCTC under the IB, a body sans parliamentary sanction or oversight, too reeks of shoddy legal formulation, if not downright empire-building on part of the Home Min.

PC apologists may point out that feedback has gone into the current notification vis-a-vis his original plan (IB centenary endowment lecture; Dec 2009). This had the NIA, NTRO, NCRB and NSG under the NCTC; as also the counter-terror work of RAW and CBI. Yet, even if watered-down, NCTC remains deeply flawed, most notably in its lack of separation of analytical and operative powers. Add lack of governaceto that, and we can put the US miliatry-industrial complex to shame in its reach. I hope sense prevails soon, with a better design that helps our counterterrorism effort acquire effective teeth. No terrorism-frontline State (for we are unmistakably one) worth its salt should settle for any less.